Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3613905.3637109acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

When Research Becomes All About the Bots: A Case Study on Fraud Prevention and Participant Validation in the Context of Abortion Storytelling

Published: 11 May 2024 Publication History

Abstract

Effective fraud prevention and participant validation are essential for ensuring data quality in today’s highly-digitized research landscape. Increasingly sophisticated bots and high levels of fraudulent participants have generated a need for more complex and nuanced methods to combat fraudulent activity. In this paper, we share our experiences with fraudulent survey responses, which we encountered in our work around abortion storytelling, and the multi-stage protocol that we developed to validate participants. We found that effective fraud prevention should start early and include a variety of flagging methods to encourage holistic pattern-searching in data. Researchers should overestimate the amount of time they will need to validate participants and consider asking participants to assist in the validation process. We encourage researchers to be transparent about the interpretive nature of this work. To this end, we contribute a Participant Validation Guide in supplemental materials for community members to adapt in their own practices.

Supplemental Material

MP4 File
Talk Video
PDF File - Intake Survey
Digital Qualtrics survey used to collect responses from people interested in ARC study participation.
PDF File - Participant Validation Guide
Document providing additional study design techniques and a table of questions and considerations to assist researchers in validating their own study data.
PDF File - Recruitment Flyer
Visual flyer used to recruit participants
PDF File - Verification Survey
Digital Qualtrics survey used in our participant validation protocol to cross-reference participant responses with the Intake Survey

References

[1]
April M. Ballard, Trey Cardwell, and April M. Young. 2019. Fraud Detection Protocol for Web-Based Research Among Men Who Have Sex With Men: Development and Descriptive Evaluation. JMIR Public Health and Surveillance 5, 1 (Feb. 2019), e12344. https://doi.org/10.2196/12344
[2]
Jose Bauermeister, Emily Pingel, Marc Zimmerman, Mick Couper, Alex Carballo-Diéguez, and Victor J. Strecher. 2012. Data Quality in web-based HIV/AIDS research: Handling Invalid and Suspicious Data. Field methods 24, 3 (Aug. 2012), 272–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X12443097
[3]
Anne M. Bowen, Candice M. Daniel, Mark L. Williams, and Grayson L. Baird. 2008. Identifying multiple submissions in Internet research: preserving data integrity. AIDS and behavior 12, 6 (Nov. 2008), 964–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10461-007-9352-2
[4]
Kate Cockrill, Ushma D. Upadhyay, Janet Turan, and Diana Greene Foster. 2013. The Stigma of Having an Abortion: Development of a Scale and Characteristics of Women Experiencing Abortion Stigma. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 45, 2 (2013), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1363/4507913 _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1363/4507913.
[5]
James Dewitt, Benjamin Capistrant, Nidhi Kohli, B. R. Simon Rosser, Darryl Mitteldorf, Enyinnaya Merengwa, and William West. 2018. Addressing Participant Validity in a Small Internet Health Survey (The Restore Study): Protocol and Recommendations for Survey Response Validation. JMIR Research Protocols 7, 4 (April 2018), e7655. https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.7655
[6]
Jillian V. Glazer, Kirsten MacDonnell, Christina Frederick, Karen Ingersoll, and Lee M. Ritterband. 2021. Liar! Liar! Identifying eligibility fraud by applicants in digital health research. Internet Interventions 25 (Sept. 2021), 100401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.invent.2021.100401
[7]
Abigail Jones, Line Caes, Tessa Rugg, Melanie Noel, Sharon Bateman, and Abbie Jordan. 2021. Challenging issues of integrity and identity of participants in non-synchronous online qualitative methods. Methods in Psychology 5 (2021), 100072. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2021.100072
[8]
K. Cassie Kresnye, Mona Y. Alqassim, Briana Hollins, Lucia Guerra-Reyes, Maria K. Wolters, and Katie A. Siek. 2020. What to Expect When You are No Longer Expecting: Information Needs of Women who Experienced a Miscarriage. In Proceedings of the 14th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare. ACM, Atlanta GA USA, 85–96. https://doi.org/10.1145/3421937.3421995
[9]
Amanda Lazar, Ben Jelen, Alisha Pradhan, and Katie A. Siek. 2021. Adopting Diffractive Reading to Advance HCI Research: A Case Study on Technology for Aging. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 28, 5 (Aug. 2021), 32:1–32:29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462326
[10]
Haley MacLeod, Ben Jelen, Annu Prabhakar, Lora Oehlberg, Katie Siek, and Kay Connelly. 2017. A Guide to Using Asynchronous Remote Communities (ARC) for Researching Distributed Populations. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology 3, 11 (July 2017), 152898. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.18-7-2017.152898
[11]
Juan F. Maestre, Haley MacLeod, Ciabhan L. Connelly, Julia C. Dunbar, Jordan Beck, Katie A. Siek, and Patrick C. Shih. 2018. Defining Through Expansion: Conducting Asynchronous Remote Communities (ARC) Research with Stigmatized Groups. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(CHI ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174131
[12]
Rachel Pozzar, Marilyn J. Hammer, Meghan Underhill-Blazey, Alexi A. Wright, James A. Tulsky, Fangxin Hong, Daniel A. Gundersen, and Donna L. Berry. 2020. Threats of Bots and Other Bad Actors to Data Quality Following Research Participant Recruitment Through Social Media: Cross-Sectional Questionnaire. Journal of Medical Internet Research 22, 10 (Oct. 2020), e23021. https://doi.org/10.2196/23021
[13]
Mandi Pratt-Chapman, Jenna Moses, and Hannah Arem. 2021. Strategies for the Identification and Prevention of Survey Fraud: Data Analysis of a Web-Based Survey. JMIR cancer 7, 3 (July 2021), 100072. https://doi.org/10.2196/30730
[14]
Damien Ridge, Laurna Bullock, Hilary Causer, Tamsin Fisher, Samantha Hider, Tom Kingstone, Lauren Gray, Ruth Riley, Nina Smyth, Victoria Silverwood, Johanna Spiers, and Jane Southam. 2023. ‘Imposter participants’ in online qualitative research, a new and increasing threat to data integrity?Health Expectations 26, 3 (2023), 941–944. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.13724 _eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/hex.13724.
[15]
Jacqueline Roehl and Darci Harland. 2022. Imposter Participants: Overcoming Methodological Challenges Related to Balancing Participant Privacy with Data Quality When Using Online Recruitment and Data Collection. The Qualitative Report 27, 11 (Nov. 2022), 2469–2485. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5475
[16]
Margaret R. Salinas. 2023. Are Your Participants Real? Dealing with Fraud in Recruiting Older Adults Online. Western Journal of Nursing Research 45, 1 (Jan. 2023), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/01939459221098468
[17]
Jennifer E. F. Teitcher, Walter O. Bockting, José A. Bauermeister, Chris J. Hoefer, Michael H. Miner, and Robert L. Klitzman. 2015. Detecting, Preventing, and Responding to “Fraudsters” in Internet Research: Ethics and Tradeoffs. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 43, 1 (April 2015), 116–133. https://doi.org/10.1111/jlme.12200 Publisher: Cambridge University Press.
[18]
Ziyi Zhang, Shuofei Zhu, Jaron Mink, Aiping Xiong, Linhai Song, and Gang Wang. 2022. Beyond Bot Detection: Combating Fraudulent Online Survey Takers. In Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022(WWW ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 699–709. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485447.3512230

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)What We Took From Metaphors: A Case of Designing For Care After AbortionProceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3679318.3685347(1-15)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Understanding fraudulence in online qualitative studies: From the researcher's perspectiveProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642732(1-17)Online publication date: 11-May-2024

Index Terms

  1. When Research Becomes All About the Bots: A Case Study on Fraud Prevention and Participant Validation in the Context of Abortion Storytelling

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '24: Extended Abstracts of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2024
      4761 pages
      ISBN:9798400703317
      DOI:10.1145/3613905
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 11 May 2024

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. asynchronous remote community
      2. digital survey
      3. fraud
      4. fraud prevention
      5. recruitment

      Qualifiers

      • Extended-abstract
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Data Availability

      Intake Survey: Digital Qualtrics survey used to collect responses from people interested in ARC study participation. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-1.pdf
      Participant Validation Guide: Document providing additional study design techniques and a table of questions and considerations to assist researchers in validating their own study data. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-2.pdf
      Recruitment Flyer: Visual flyer used to recruit participants https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-3.pdf
      Verification Survey: Digital Qualtrics survey used in our participant validation protocol to cross-reference participant responses with the Intake Survey https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-4.pdf
      Intake Survey: Digital Qualtrics survey used to collect responses from people interested in ARC study participation. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-1.pdf
      Participant Validation Guide: Document providing additional study design techniques and a table of questions and considerations to assist researchers in validating their own study data. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-2.pdf
      Recruitment Flyer: Visual flyer used to recruit participants https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-3.pdf
      Verification Survey: Digital Qualtrics survey used in our participant validation protocol to cross-reference participant responses with the Intake Survey https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3613905.3637109#3613905.3637109-supplement-4.pdf

      Funding Sources

      Conference

      CHI '24

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 6,164 of 23,696 submissions, 26%

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)335
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)77
      Reflects downloads up to 16 Oct 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)What We Took From Metaphors: A Case of Designing For Care After AbortionProceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/3679318.3685347(1-15)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2024
      • (2024)Understanding fraudulence in online qualitative studies: From the researcher's perspectiveProceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3613904.3642732(1-17)Online publication date: 11-May-2024

      View Options

      Get Access

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Full Text

      View this article in Full Text.

      Full Text

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format.

      HTML Format

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media